I have one additional commandment, which I try to follow, and which is either a corollary to or a summary of several of Russell's:
Always keep in mind that at least some of your students will be smarter than you. Give them what they need and don't treat them as a threat.
They may not yet be as knowledgeable as you (presumably not, at least in your area of expertise), and if you're particularly smart there may not be very many of them, but they'll show up someday and from time to time. This commandment manifests in various ways, from something as simple as a willingness to say "I don't know" on up to giving students an alternate, challenging path through an assignment when they're bored with the default.
IME, the best teachers all (possibly subconsciously) followed this rule, and it was violations of this rule that made the worst teachers so bad.
This reminded me of my high school physics professor who always answered with a "maybe" whenever he felt the student had more insight into something than he did. It looks simplistic, but it was very encouraging as a response, even when we students reached a halt most of the time.
Total aside but I'm curious. Was your high-school class lead by a bona fide professor or are you using the term in the French sense of "teacher"?
Latterly my UK high-school had a doctor (Ph.D) as the head of physics but that was quite rare at the time (and I expect is now).
Leads me on to wonder what sort of high-school class Einstein or Feynman or Hawking or ... might put together; indeed, whether they could do it well.
--
Edit: For some reason I can't reply to you, I was going to guess you were French but it seemed like too long a shot, and it was ... thanks for your answer. Your written English is impeccable.
Well this is a particular case. On one hand my teacher did have a phd and was a brilliant man. On the other hand I am Moroccan and English is my third language after Arabic and French, both of which tolerate the use of professor to refer to a teacher (Although they have words for both).
I agree, though I wouldn't quite say smarter. It sounds too close to being "better" than someone. I think the general principle is learn to truly listen to someone without judgements, or your ego getting in the way. It's a prerequisite for empathy and compassion.
It is easy to be generous when you are a standard deviation better than the student at some task. It is harder when they are two standard deviations better than you and pat you on the head when you make a mistake.
This is a needless restatement of things Russell said so much more elegantly. Your addition conveys no useful advice and yet manages to be both vague and vacuous, possibly you are a teacher.
- that last parenthetical 'possibly you are a teacher'. It is clear from his post he is a teacher. That comment is an attempt to lend credence to your assertions by making yourself seem insightful and semi-clairvoyant, by 'guessing' he is a teacher. We all understand he is a teacher. I hate it when people use sneaky fallacies like that.
- You accuse someone of 'not giving useful advice' and 'managing to be vague and vacuous', when you yourself do not offer any useful advice and fail to explain why the statements you are responding to would be 'vague and vacuous', making your own statement 'vague and vacuous'. When harshly criticizing someone, always make sure the criticism doesn't apply to your own argument or yourself. It prevents you from looking like a hypocrite.
- It is completely unclear what you intend to achieve with your criticism. Do you honestly believe someone will respond like 'oh jeez, you're right, how could I be so silly?'. Your post is abrasive and will not achieve its goal. Did it even have a purpose other than 'throwing your thoughts out there'? If not: please stew on them a bit longer next time and explain why you are telling us this.
- In fact, the post you respond to makes a very practical point, much more practical than the more 'vague' general rules Russell provides. It is not a 'needless restatement': it is a much needed explication of what practical behavior these rules lead to. It provides an example of an application of Russell's principles, that makes those principles concrete.
I am indeed a teacher, as I said, and I'll add that the particular aspect of my post that is not explicitly addressed in Russell's commandments is the notion of students being smarter than the teacher. It's a useful lens through which you can look at the problem.
Always keep in mind that at least some of your students will be smarter than you. Give them what they need and don't treat them as a threat.
They may not yet be as knowledgeable as you (presumably not, at least in your area of expertise), and if you're particularly smart there may not be very many of them, but they'll show up someday and from time to time. This commandment manifests in various ways, from something as simple as a willingness to say "I don't know" on up to giving students an alternate, challenging path through an assignment when they're bored with the default.
IME, the best teachers all (possibly subconsciously) followed this rule, and it was violations of this rule that made the worst teachers so bad.